Leicester at risk of another Premier League PSR charge over latest accounts

[Dahnsouff]

14 minutes ago, Babylon said:

This place is a good giggle...

 

"We're so financially incompetent to not pass PSR"

 

2 seconds later...

 

"Why aren't we signing anyone"

You are 100% correct, this place is legend.  

[les-tah]

Random thought to positively add to psr.. did we ever get a fee from a tribunal for that toungester who went to liverpool then immediately played first team a few times?

[kenny]

26 minutes ago, les-tah said:

Random thought to positively add to psr.. did we ever get a fee from a tribunal for that toungester who went to liverpool then immediately played first team a few times?

Nyoni.

 

This hasn't been settled yet I don't think. Certainly not publicised anywhere if it's been settled.

[Number 6]

38 minutes ago, CosbehFox said:

There’s a link being made which I don’t quite get and it suggests to me the club aren’t that confident about their actual accounts rather they are confident of De Marco getting the job done again. 
 

A lot of these articles say LCFC don’t have much room to do transfers this January due to FFP yet the supposed charge is nothing to do with this January window. Rather the success of this window dictates if FFP will be a problem in the three year window including this season going forward because of allowable losses etc. 

 

The only link I can see is how you might persuade players to join a club likely to receive a points deduction (even in the interim). 
 

But ultimately at this time right now the FFP decision next week should not have any bearing on how we operate in January. Unless of course, they rightly ****ed the budget for this year (or they have confidence in the T3 loophole). So something amiss or not quite in sync 

This is potentially encouraging if we're looking to get our house in order. In theory we've got a -£90m dropping off for PSR. Any result better than that this year improves our PSR position which would suggest you could spend quite heavily this January.

 

The continued tightening of purse strings however suggests we aren't looking to have another huge loss this year. Potentially good for a few reasons:

 

- acceptance that we may well go down and need to get our house in order

- smoothing out of results to allow better PSR management: prevents the peak and trough years we currently have

- allowing for the lower Champ budget to hit us next year

 

We had a disastrous summer window imo, but there's at least some signs here of accepting that the way out of this mess isn't by further huge gambles. Suspect if the right target was available then we'd do business, but we're being more restrained by the looks of things.

[Bert]

2 minutes ago, kenny said:

Nyoni.

 

This hasn't been settled yet I don't think. Certainly not publicised anywhere if it's been settled.

And even so, it will be a nominal fee. 

[Lambert09]

55 minutes ago, Babylon said:

 

The amount people read into nothing articles is astonishing.

I’d agree on the lions share of articles about us, but Percy is the one in the know 

[Lambert09]

1 hour ago, ClaphamFox said:

If it's close, how can we have 'breached massively'?

My point was that he has been known to be used for positive propaganda. Meaning, of course the club would want us to think it’s close. 
 

if we were safe, they’d know and the article would say we are clear. if we failed… it will say something like “it’s close”, it’s pr damage control. 
 

After all the trials, the  club know the rules better than anyone,  we would know ourselves if we were over or under the breach levels. We’re not waiting on a blind vote, it’s accounting ffs

[ClaphamFox]

14 minutes ago, Lambert09 said:

My point was that he has been known to be used for positive propaganda. Meaning, of course the club would want us to think it’s close. 
 

if we were safe, they’d know and the article would say we are clear. if we failed… it will say something like “it’s close”, it’s pr damage control. 
 

After all the trials, the  club know the rules better than anyone,  we would know ourselves if we were over or under the breach levels. We’re not waiting on a blind vote, it’s accounting ffs

What would be the advantage of briefing a journalist that it's very close if in fact it was massive? The truth will come out very soon either way. The 'PR damage control' would last for just a few days before  completely disintegrating. There's no sense in it.

 

No, we're not waiting on a 'blind vote', but it's nowhere near as black and white as you describe. There are different interpretations of what counts as an allowable loss (ie, outside the scope of PSR) and what doesn't. Then of course there's the issue of whether the £83m or the £105m limit applies.

 

I suspect the club's position is that we haven't breached and that the PL is arguing that we have, and another legal battle is heading our way to sort it out (unless of course it's already been settled but the outcome has not been revealed). Irrespective, given that none of the experts are predicting a massive breach, I'll be very surprised if that turns out to be the case.

Edited 9 January by ClaphamFox

[Pliskin]

44 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said:

What would be the advantage of briefing a journalist that it's very close if in fact it was massive? The truth will come out very soon either way. The 'PR damage control' would last for just a few days before  completely disintegrating. There's no sense in it.

 

No, we're not waiting on a 'blind vote', but it's nowhere near as black and white as you describe. There are different interpretations of what counts as an allowable loss (ie, outside the scope of PSR) and what doesn't. Then of course there's the issue of whether the £83m or the £105m limit applies.

 

I suspect the club's position is that we haven't breached and that the PL is arguing that we have, and another legal battle is heading our way to sort it out (unless of course it's already been settled but the outcome has not been revealed). Irrespective, given that none of the experts are predicting a massive breach, I'll be very surprised if that turns out to be the case.

It can’t possibly be a “massive breach” anyway, we’ve lost a lot of big earners and have gained a promotion and league title along the way. It will be a close breach if anything at all. 
 

The club saying they’re confident tells me they’ve had a professional (maybe one of De Marco’s team) look over the accounts to ensure we are in line…. And if the PL want to challenge our evidence we’ve already got the appeal ready. 

Edited 9 January by Pliskin

[ClaphamFox]

1 minute ago, Pliskin said:

It can’t possibly be a “massive breach” anyway, we’ve lost a lot of bit earners and have gained a promotion and league title along the way. It will be a close breach if anything at all. 
 

The club saying they’re confident tells me they’ve had a professional (maybe one of De Marco’s team) look over the accounts to ensure we are in line…. And if the PL want to challenge our evidence we’ve already got the appeal ready. 

I think you may well be correct.

[Babylon]

27 minutes ago, Lambert09 said:

I’d agree on the lions share of articles about us, but Percy is the one in the know 

He doesn't even say anything of note, other than we are confident of passing it. Which he said ages ago anyway. 

[KansasFox]

I really don’t know if this is possible, but I love the idea that we have legal costs around the last PSR charge that are now paid by the premier league, because we won the case, that is enough to  just get us over the line this time

[urban.spaceman]

3 hours ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

Forest are 3rd. 

So were Villa last season. Look at them now. 
 

So were Newcastle the previous season. Look at them after that.

 

So were we for two seasons in a row, winning the cup and reaching the semis in Europe. Look at our last 3 seasons. 
 

The rules are explicitly designed to punish ambition by a league that directly controls profitability. 
 

Whatever happens to Forest this season, they won’t be allowed to progress any further. Villa weren’t. Newcastle, owned by a nation state, weren’t. We certainly weren’t. 

[kenny]

37 minutes ago, Bert said:

And even so, it will be a nominal fee. 

I'm sure it will exceed the Elliott or Mheuka fees.

 

Man City paid us £1m for Nouboussie.

 

It the rumours are true that Liverpool have been tapping up then we ought be getting more than £5m for him.

[Lambert09]

31 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

So were Villa last season. Look at them now. 
 

So were Newcastle the previous season. Look at them after that.

 

So were we for two seasons in a row, winning the cup and reaching the semis in Europe. Look at our last 3 seasons. 
 

The rules are explicitly designed to punish ambition by a league that directly controls profitability. 
 

Whatever happens to Forest this season, they won’t be allowed to progress any further. Villa weren’t. Newcastle, owned by a nation state, weren’t. We certainly weren’t. 

Villa spent the most money in the summer didn’t they? I wouldn’t say they’ve been hamstrung at all. They just got their deals wrong 

[DezFox]

Can’t even keep our good assets long enough to help PSR. Even Monga off to Man City on other thread for what will be nearly nothing. 

[ClaphamFox]

2 minutes ago, DezFox said:

Can’t even keep our good assets long enough to help PSR. Even Monga off to Man City on other thread for what will be nearly nothing. 

If Monga is really off and it has all been agreed, why is the club going out of its way to promote him on social media ahead of the Saturday's game? Why would it go out of its way to big up a player who it knows will be off soon? 

[DezFox]

1 minute ago, ClaphamFox said:

If Monga is really off and it has all been agreed, why is the club going out of its way to promote him on social media ahead of the Saturday's game? Why would it go out of its way to big up a player who it knows will be off soon? 

Don’t know mate, maybe last ditch  attempt to try and keep him. Hope it’s not true just someone said it’s done 

[Wink84]

3 hours ago, urban.spaceman said:

Was she expecting The Gruffalo?!

Nope, The Big Bad Jon

[Wink84]

2 hours ago, Happy Fox said:

Seems Ruud thinks all is well on the transfer front has Rudkin told him the news 

Bad reception from his villa in Spain so Jon could get through to him 

[Lineker's Left Foot]

33 minutes ago, DezFox said:

Don’t know mate, maybe last ditch  attempt to try and keep him. Hope it’s not true just someone said it’s done 

Not one penny more to these imbeciles at the club.  Prefer going to gigs and listening to music now tbh.  Have seen my beloved team win everything but just feel so disheartened and disconnected to this club that I ‘used to love’.

 

Results don’t tend to bother me anymore

now either.  So sad

 

[LCFCJohn]

3 hours ago, Miquel The Work Geordie said:

Just dissected the Swiss Ramble with my one year old daughter, she is aghast at what she's read

Has it ruined her upcoming first birthday?

[filbertway]

1 hour ago, urban.spaceman said:

So were Villa last season. Look at them now. 
 

So were Newcastle the previous season. Look at them after that.

 

So were we for two seasons in a row, winning the cup and reaching the semis in Europe. Look at our last 3 seasons. 
 

The rules are explicitly designed to punish ambition by a league that directly controls profitability. 
 

Whatever happens to Forest this season, they won’t be allowed to progress any further. Villa weren’t. Newcastle, owned by a nation state, weren’t. We certainly weren’t. 

And yet the league is the most open it's been in years. Weird.

[st albans fox]

48 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said:

If Monga is really off and it has all been agreed, why is the club going out of its way to promote him on social media ahead of the Saturday's game? Why would it go out of its way to big up a player who it knows will be off soon? 

How many tickets are left for  Saturday  ???.

[urban.spaceman]

48 minutes ago, Lambert09 said:

Villa spent the most money in the summer didn’t they? I wouldn’t say they’ve been hamstrung at all. They just got their deals wrong